List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:mos Date:April 22 2009 6:18am
Subject:Re: Oracle , what else ?
View as plain text  
At 07:13 PM 4/21/2009, you wrote:
>It will great if the MYSQL guys were to buy mysql from Oracle for half the
>price that Sun paid.

Yeah, I'm sure Widenous is writing a check as we speak. <rofl> He is busy 
working on Maria, a stripped down branch of MySQL.
http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2008/01/maria-engine-is-released.html

>They would come out making lots of money and back controlling their own
>destiny.

Anyone can have control of the MySQL code because it is GPL. The only thing 
stopping them is time and $$$ to organize another company, maybe call it 
MySQL CD??

Mike


>:-)
>
>On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Arthur Fuller <fuller.artful@stripped>wrote:
>
> > I hereby bet the farm that this shall not occur. I have $10 to say that
> > this
> > shall not occur.
> >
> > a) Who is going to challenge the deal?
> > b) What possible purpose would it serve to interr MySQL?
> > c) Assuming there is some reason for b) above, why incur the wrath of the
> > MySQL community and their possible bail-outs? Nothing gained and everything
> > lost, in such a move.
> > d) If we know anything, we know that Scott and Larry are not fools.
> > e) In the grand scheme of things, the MySQL piece of this pie is peanuts
> > and
> > perhaps less. This acquisition is about the big picture (hardware platform
> > +
> > existing Sparc base + Java, etc.). MySQL, as much as we love it, is a tiny
> > teensy part of this acquisition, and my guess is that Scott and Larry are
> > much more focussed on the other parts (e.g. end-to-end solutions extending
> > from the hardware to the middleware to the Oracle apps, etc.) and in this
> > ballpark MySQL is an interesting tidbit but not at all the focus of their
> > efforts. Think big, baby. MySQL in this context is a tiny little ripple in
> > the pond, having little or nothing to do with Scott/Larry's plans.
> >
> > Viewed from this perspective, MySQL becomes a viable alternative to such
> > offerings as SQL Express from MS. If for no other reasons than marketing
> > imperatives, I am confident that Scott and Larry will choose not to kill
> > MySQL but rather regard it as both an entry platform and a position from
> > which to upgrade to Oracle.
> >
> > Make no mistake about this. There are very sound reasons to upgrade to
> > Oracle. Cost is of course a serious issue. But Oracle can do things, and
> > has
> > various top-end vehicles, that MySQL cannot approach. Consider, to take
> > just
> > one example, Trusted Oracle, upon which numerous banks bet their bottom
> > dollar. Add to this the numerous Oracle Apps.
> >
> > I am no champion of Oracle in particular, but I do rtheecognize what
> > platforms X and Y can do. If the game is defined as retrieval amongst
> > several GB of data, then MySQL has a chance. If the game is retrieval
> > amongst several PB of data, with security, then I bet on Oracle. Granted,
> > this move requires a team of DBAs etc., but if you are dealing with
> > PetaBytes then I suggest that you think carefully about which vendor is
> > prepared to take you there.
> >
> > Just my $0.02 in this debate. I don't see MySQL and Oracle as competitive
> > products. In fact I see the opposite: Oracle gets to occupy a space in the
> > open-source community while simultanwously offering an upgrade path to
> > multi-petabyte solutions, serious security, and so on. I don't think that
> > Scott and Larry are out to hurt the MySQL community, and I'm prepared to
> > bet
> > that they will invest in the next version of MySQL, You might disagree but
> > I
> > challenge you to answer Why? Sheer rapaciousness? That doesn't make sense.
> > MySQL has garnered numerous big-time players, and in what possible interest
> > would Oracle jeapordize these investments?
> >
> > As several writers on this thread have said, if Oracle muddies the waters
> > then they are prepared to move to PostGres and/or several other
> > alternatives, not least to take the MySQL sources to a new playpen. It is
> > clearly not in the interests of Oracle to let this happen. Far more
> > interesting is to fold the MySQL project into Oracle's overall Linux
> > project. Continue to offer MySQL for free, work on transport vehicles that
> > let MySQL people migrate effortlessly to Oracle, etc.
> >
> > I don't mean to pretend to read Scott and Larry's minds here. But I think
> > that the MySQL part of this acquisition, while interesting, is a small part
> > of the rationale for buying Sun. The serious interest is in acquiring an
> > end-to-end solution, as yet offered by nobody, including IBM and MS. This
> > is
> > the most significant part of this acquisition. Imagine being the
> > salesperson
> > of said stack. "We have the hardware and the operating system and the
> > middleware and the front-end. Click and go."
> >
> > IMO this is a truly formidable argument. In practice, it could be delivered
> > as an appliance and/or a blade. And if you don't think this is formidable,
> > then wake up and smell the coffee. This could well leap-frog certain other
> > competitors -- which is not to say they won't catch up eventually, but it
> > is
> > to say that Oracle has raised the bar and it's time for competitors such as
> > MS to jump through several flaming hoops.
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 6:57 PM, John Daisley <
> > john.daisley@stripped> wrote:
> >
> > > MySQL will live on regardless of who owns the brand. First and foremost
> > > MySQL is a community and that community will continue to develop MySQL
> > and
> > > take it in the direction they want it to go. Sure Oracle could try and
> > > force some 'features' or changes through but if the community didn't like
> > > them the community would just keep developing 'pre-oracle' MySQL, even if
> > > that happens to be under a different name.
> > >
> > > Personally I would be surprised if the Oracle deal goes unchallenged. I
> > > don't think Oracle really 'want' MySQL as it makes very little money and
> > > it raises competition concerns. I wouldn't be surprised if Oracle were to
> > > look at offloading MySQL to ease competition fears, perhaps to someone
> > > like Google who are already heavily involved in the development of MySQL.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 22:36 +0100, Andy Shellam wrote:
> > >
> > > > Personally (and I hope I'm wrong) I don't believe there's room in
> > > > Oracle's portfolio for two diverse RDBMSs, and I envisage them
> > > > re-branding MySQL as an Oracle open-source derivative which begins as
> > > > being the MySQL codebase but is slowly migrated toward Oracle's
> > > > engineering, to ease the transition for growing companies moving from
> > > > MySQL/Oracle open-source to the Oracle enterprise versions.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > MySQL General Mailing List
> > > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=1
> > >
> > >
> >

Thread
Oracle , what else ?Gilles MISSONNIER21 Apr
  • Re: Oracle , what else ?Simon Connah21 Apr
  • Re: Oracle , what else ?Martijn Tonies21 Apr
    • Re: Oracle , what else ?Joshua D. Drake22 Apr
      • Re: Oracle , what else ?Glyn Astill23 Apr
        • Re: Oracle , what else ?Joshua D. Drake23 Apr
  • Re: Oracle , what else ?mos21 Apr
    • Re: Oracle , what else ?Andy Shellam21 Apr
    • Re: Oracle , what else ?Yves Goergen23 Apr
    • RE: Oracle , what else ?Gabriel - IP Guys23 Apr
      • RE: Oracle , what else ?Janek Bogucki28 Apr
        • RE: Oracle , what else ?John Daisley28 Apr
          • RE: Oracle , what else ?mos28 Apr
      • RE: Oracle , what else ?Janek Bogucki28 Apr
  • Re: Oracle , what else ?Martijn Tonies24 Apr
    • Re: Oracle , what else ?Joshua D. Drake24 Apr
    • Re: Oracle , what else ?mos24 Apr
Re: Oracle , what else ?John Daisley22 Apr
  • Re: Oracle , what else ?Arthur Fuller22 Apr
    • Re: Oracle , what else ?NĂ©stor22 Apr
      • Re: Oracle , what else ?mos22 Apr
        • Re: Oracle , what else ?Krishna Chandra Prajapati22 Apr
  • Re: Oracle , what else ?Martijn Tonies22 Apr
RE: Oracle , what else ?Joshua D. Drake24 Apr
  • Re: Oracle , what else ?David Sparks24 Apr
    • Re: Oracle , what else ?Glyn Astill24 Apr
      • Re: Oracle , what else ?David Sparks24 Apr
        • Re: Oracle , what else ?Glyn Astill24 Apr
          • Index time columns?Bryan Cantwell24 Apr
            • RE: Index time columns?Andrew Braithwaite27 Apr
        • Re: Oracle , what else ?Joshua D. Drake27 Apr
      • Re: Oracle , what else ?Joshua D. Drake27 Apr
    • Re: Oracle , what else ?Joshua D. Drake27 Apr